RSLudlum
08-16-2008, 08:20 PM
Did anybody else get a ballot from The Heritage Foundation on the fiscal responsibility of the federal gov't?
I filled mine out and sent it off with a list of opinions on the questions and the subjects attended. ;)
I couldn't find a copy of the questions to post here, but here's my list I included in their 'postage paid' envelope. :D
To Whom It May Concern:
While I applaud the work The Heritage Foundation does, I do have problems with the wording of the questions posed in this ballot. It seems many of the questions do not get to the heart of federal government’s fiscal irresponsibility. Below, I will attempt to point out the problems, as I see it with respect to government spending, according to each question posed and express my opinions.
1. Although pork projects are a major problem with congressional spending, especially in the respect that my federal tax dollars are going to pay for projects that don’t directly aid me, I believe there is a major underlying corporate/social welfare issue in the United States today with the tax system that makes people agree with the projects because the citizens want their tax dollars back. And the pork projects seem to quench this want (serving convenience for political campaigns) while I, as an individual, have no such want. I prefer an enormous reduction in the federal government that would ultimately lead to a drastic cut in spending and therefore taxation.
2. Does the list of “liberals like Nancy Pelosi” include those Republicans that are also in-line with her fiscal spending, but just not on the same issues? There are many fiscally liberal Republicans, while there are also some fiscally conservative Democrats. Although I am a Republican, I will be voting for the Democratic candidate Bob Conley in the South Carolina US Senate race. My vote will not be so much a vote against Lindsey Graham, as it will be for a truly Conservative candidate.
3. I am of the persuasion that citizens’ privacy (secrecy) is a right that should be respected and protected by the government. Government secrecy should be an oxymoron in a free and open society that depends on an informed public to practice democracy in a republic.
4. Considering my disgust with the federal government’s policies in the past 20+ years, the federal government shouldn’t be spending on anything but those duties specifically expressed in the Constitution. Yes, I don’t like ‘activist’ Supreme Court judges that believe the Constitution is a “living breathing document”.
5. If I run up credit card bills knowing I am terminally ill and won’t have to work to pay off the debt, thereby upon my death leaving my children or other family members with the responsibility to deal with the debt, am I fiscally responsible? Same goes for congress and the executive branch!
6. Personally, I would like the option to opt out of Social Security and Meidicare for myself and children. Parents can opt children out of Social Security upon birth, but many are not aware of this ability. I believe this is the biggest problem with budgets of the future. They cannot be funded without limiting benefits, raising the benefit age, and raising the taxes paid into the so called ‘trust fund’. Why am I paying for my father’s social security when he’s paid into the system his entire work life? Once again, fiscally irresponsible and morally corrupt!
7. I disapprove of any government spending that private individuals could do themselves in the ‘free market’ that we are suppose to believe we have.
8. Same as above (#7)
9. What does the word ‘sensible’ mean in this question? Anybody that wants to spend money on something can find a ‘sensible’ reason to do so. I do agree to a cap, but a more sensible action would be a limit on what the federal government can do, ie revisit the limit powers in the Constitution.
10. If waste is the problem, limit the material that is being wasted. In other words, decrease the size of the government, and reduce taxes across the board, forcing the system to be efficient for it to survive. Ordinary citizens and corporations do it (so long as there is no ‘free lunch program’ they can use.)
11. Yes, eliminating corporate welfare is fiscally responsible but eliminating social/public welfare programs is also responsible. If the federal income tax was drastically reduced or eliminated, citizens would have more money to buy products that would in turn produce more capital for the corporations thereby eliminating the need for corporate welfare and reduce the necessity of social welfare programs because more jobs would be available. Congress also has to practice extremely more oversight on the Federal Reserve (esp. in terms of money creation, inflation), and not the opposite by giving the Federal Reserve more powers that will be unchecked by Congress’s historical lack of review.
12. Redundancy in government is redundancy in itself. Put these occurrences in combination with interest owed on the debt and it is a disaster. Einstein once said, “Compounding is the most powerful force in the universe”. In our present state, it is the most destructive.
I filled mine out and sent it off with a list of opinions on the questions and the subjects attended. ;)
I couldn't find a copy of the questions to post here, but here's my list I included in their 'postage paid' envelope. :D
To Whom It May Concern:
While I applaud the work The Heritage Foundation does, I do have problems with the wording of the questions posed in this ballot. It seems many of the questions do not get to the heart of federal government’s fiscal irresponsibility. Below, I will attempt to point out the problems, as I see it with respect to government spending, according to each question posed and express my opinions.
1. Although pork projects are a major problem with congressional spending, especially in the respect that my federal tax dollars are going to pay for projects that don’t directly aid me, I believe there is a major underlying corporate/social welfare issue in the United States today with the tax system that makes people agree with the projects because the citizens want their tax dollars back. And the pork projects seem to quench this want (serving convenience for political campaigns) while I, as an individual, have no such want. I prefer an enormous reduction in the federal government that would ultimately lead to a drastic cut in spending and therefore taxation.
2. Does the list of “liberals like Nancy Pelosi” include those Republicans that are also in-line with her fiscal spending, but just not on the same issues? There are many fiscally liberal Republicans, while there are also some fiscally conservative Democrats. Although I am a Republican, I will be voting for the Democratic candidate Bob Conley in the South Carolina US Senate race. My vote will not be so much a vote against Lindsey Graham, as it will be for a truly Conservative candidate.
3. I am of the persuasion that citizens’ privacy (secrecy) is a right that should be respected and protected by the government. Government secrecy should be an oxymoron in a free and open society that depends on an informed public to practice democracy in a republic.
4. Considering my disgust with the federal government’s policies in the past 20+ years, the federal government shouldn’t be spending on anything but those duties specifically expressed in the Constitution. Yes, I don’t like ‘activist’ Supreme Court judges that believe the Constitution is a “living breathing document”.
5. If I run up credit card bills knowing I am terminally ill and won’t have to work to pay off the debt, thereby upon my death leaving my children or other family members with the responsibility to deal with the debt, am I fiscally responsible? Same goes for congress and the executive branch!
6. Personally, I would like the option to opt out of Social Security and Meidicare for myself and children. Parents can opt children out of Social Security upon birth, but many are not aware of this ability. I believe this is the biggest problem with budgets of the future. They cannot be funded without limiting benefits, raising the benefit age, and raising the taxes paid into the so called ‘trust fund’. Why am I paying for my father’s social security when he’s paid into the system his entire work life? Once again, fiscally irresponsible and morally corrupt!
7. I disapprove of any government spending that private individuals could do themselves in the ‘free market’ that we are suppose to believe we have.
8. Same as above (#7)
9. What does the word ‘sensible’ mean in this question? Anybody that wants to spend money on something can find a ‘sensible’ reason to do so. I do agree to a cap, but a more sensible action would be a limit on what the federal government can do, ie revisit the limit powers in the Constitution.
10. If waste is the problem, limit the material that is being wasted. In other words, decrease the size of the government, and reduce taxes across the board, forcing the system to be efficient for it to survive. Ordinary citizens and corporations do it (so long as there is no ‘free lunch program’ they can use.)
11. Yes, eliminating corporate welfare is fiscally responsible but eliminating social/public welfare programs is also responsible. If the federal income tax was drastically reduced or eliminated, citizens would have more money to buy products that would in turn produce more capital for the corporations thereby eliminating the need for corporate welfare and reduce the necessity of social welfare programs because more jobs would be available. Congress also has to practice extremely more oversight on the Federal Reserve (esp. in terms of money creation, inflation), and not the opposite by giving the Federal Reserve more powers that will be unchecked by Congress’s historical lack of review.
12. Redundancy in government is redundancy in itself. Put these occurrences in combination with interest owed on the debt and it is a disaster. Einstein once said, “Compounding is the most powerful force in the universe”. In our present state, it is the most destructive.